ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Automated detection of small hepatocellular carcinoma in cirrhotic livers: applying deep learning to Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Deep learning for automatic detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo develop an automated deep learning (DL) methodology for detecting small hepatocellular carcinoma (sHCC) in cirrhotic livers, leveraging Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI.
methodsThe present retrospective study included a total of 120 patients with cirrhosis, comprising 78 patients with sHCC and 42 patients with non-HCC cirrhosis, who were selected through stratified sampling. The dataset was divided into training and testing sets (8:2 ratio). The nnU-Net exhibits enhanced capabilities in segmenting small objects. The segmentation performance was assessed using the Dice coefficient. The ability to distinguish between sHCC and non-HCC lesions was evaluated through ROC curves, AUC scores and P values. The case-level detection performance for sHCC was evaluated through several metrics: accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.
resultsThe AUCs for distinguishing sHCC patients from non-HCC patients at the lesion level were 0.967 and 0.864 for the training and test cohorts, respectively, both of which were statistically significant at P < 0.001. At the case level, distinguishing between patients with sHCC and patients with cirrhosis resulted in accuracies of 92.5% (95% CI, 85.1-96.9%) and 81.5% (95% CI, 61.9-93.7%), sensitivities of 95.1% (95% CI, 86.3-99.0%) and 88.2% (95% CI, 63.6-98.5%), and specificities of 87.5% (95% CI, 71.0-96.5%) and 70% (95% CI, 34.8-93.3%) for the training and test sets, respectively.
conclusionThe DL methodology demonstrated its efficacy in detecting sHCC within a cohort of patients with cirrhosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40059243What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.